[Ken H]

"Marshalling an impressive array of historical evidence, a growing body of scholarly commentary indicates that the 'right to keep and bear arms' is, as the Amendment's text suggests, a personal right."

-- Justice Clarence Thomas, Printz v US

[RayStacy]

Yes, it is an individual right, just like the right not to be taxed for a FEDERALLY supported church. AGAIN and again and again and again and again and again and again -- for roughly one hundred years the states operated without any regard for the BOR. Want to see the list again?

[RayStacy]

You are supposed to find a source that says the BOR was meant to apply to the states. If CT had said, "The RTKBA has always been meant to prohibit state regulation" that would have fit the bill. Again -- I thought you were NOT relying on the BOR for the gun rites?

[tpaine]

How can a State disarm its citizens without violating the above Clauses and the Second Amendment?
333 posted by Ken H

_____________________________________


Well put.
You will NOT get a rational answer from any 'states rights' advocate on this forum.
337 tpaine

_____________________________________


"Marshalling an impressive array of historical evidence, a growing body of scholarly commentary indicates that the 'right to keep and bear arms' is, as the Amendment's text suggests, a personal right."
-- Justice Clarence Thomas, Printz v US
340 Ken H


_____________________________________


As we see, the attempted rationalization is based on ONE DOZEN FOX in the HENHOUSE SUPREME COURT CASES which claim the BOR does not apply to the states.

Next we'll be asked to believe that our government man is here to help.